RIP 4th Amendment

It's a calculated move to make him appear tough on terror, but I think he's calculating wrong. He's alienating the people who support him, in order to court the people who will NEVER support him. Same as he did with the "faith based initiatives." Bad moves IMO, both of them...of course I'm just a concerned citizen, not a scheming political spin doctor.

If Hillary were the nominee, I bet she'd be doing the same.

Click to expand...

true, sometimes I think political advisers are like real-estate agents, their solution is always paint it white.

McKBrew said:

I have a different view on the "removal" of our freedoms that so many people are scared of. I do fully agree that the government is going too far in some areas, but I wonder what the other options are. Do we totally avoid any form of phone monitoring, e-mail monitoring, etc... when we know that those methods can be used for terrorists to communicate? Do I really need to be concerned that someone might be monitoring my phone calls, when I have nothing to hide?

I understand both sides of the argument, and am not sure what the solution is. I'm not as much of a Bush supporter as I used to be, but I still do not think he is as bad as he is made out to be. (He is unpopular, but he is doing the same stuff that American presidents have been doing for the last 200+ years). I think there are dishonest republicans and I think there are dishonest democrats.

Life in the US might not be what it used to be, but I still feel thankful that I live in a great country where I can enjoy doing what I like to do.

Click to expand...

for me it comes down to this. even though i may have nothing to hide i want someone to ask if they can come in and search my home. and i want to see they have properly followed procedure. right now they can walk in the door and search and not tell you. or even tell you why. it has been long standing that any bell employee could get fired for letting others know what might be said on a phone conversation when the monitor to check to see if anyone is on for line testing. including up to murder. meaning there was a time when someone was fired for reporting a planning of a murder to the police. even though that is still in place for every day people who work in the offices its not for the ceo and others who took part of this. i dont feel safe when someone has a right to ask me for my papers at anytime for any reason. did you know they had a DHS notification sent to all LEO that said if they see someone with an almanac to get the vehicle information date and time and forward it to them because anyone with one can use the information to plan a terrorist act.

you can data mine anyone and find something on them that makes them look like terrorists given enough details. just data mining DIY homebrew propane fertilizer bio diesel can lead to being flagged. and trust me i have searched those things considering each one at one point in time has peaked my interest.

since this all started with bush pre 9-11 i put the entire blame on him his cronies and the current lot in congress except for the few who stood up.

BlindLemonLars said:

It's a calculated move to make him appear tough on terror, but I think he's calculating wrong. He's alienating the people who support him, in order to court the people who will NEVER support him. Same as he did with the "faith based initiatives." Bad moves IMO, both of them...of course I'm just a concerned citizen, not a scheming political spin doctor.

If Hillary were the nominee, I bet she'd be doing the same.

Click to expand...

This is what should really have conservatives freaking out, not where Obama differs with Bush, but where they agree. Despite all Obama's rhetoric to the contrary, this vote shows that one of the areas where he and Bush line up is on the extreme extension of executive power taken on by Bush. While many conservatives might have been perfectly happy to have an unchecked executive with a conservative in office I doubt they'll be happy when the situation changes. I think conservatives have to look at this stuff and honestly ask themselves if they would be okay with these constitutional incursions if a Democrat were doing this.

McKBrew said:

Is the technology really that good that it can monitor everything, everywhere? Since the law is approved, then the new technology should be operational, I'll let you know if men in black suits come knocking in the next few weeks.

When I brew, I worship the beer gods, but not the beer ALLAH.
Some of my fermenters remind me of those pictures of NUCLEAR reactors.
I started kegging, so now I don't worry about bottle BOMBS.
My biggest fear is that TERRORISTS might attack and invade my homebrew supply.

Click to expand...

as someone who works in the industry i would have to say yes tech is that good. even though they still only monitor maybe 5% its still enough to be threating as it is only getting better as far as tech is concerned.

It's not the tech that's good or not - tech is tech, and today's tech is incredible.

It's the people using the tech. My company uses it to insure you never pay off your credit card.

Fantastic tech, asshat people behind the wheel.

Soulive said:

+1...I feel the same was pretty much. I feel like I'm wasting my vote, but I don't want either of them...

Click to expand...

Bob Barr/Ron Paul ticket anyone?

I USED to support Obama, but he showed his true colors today.

McKBrew said:

I have a different view on the "removal" of our freedoms that so many people are scared of. I do fully agree that the government is going too far in some areas, but I wonder what the other options are. Do we totally avoid any form of phone monitoring, e-mail monitoring, etc... when we know that those methods can be used for terrorists to communicate? Do I really need to be concerned that someone might be monitoring my phone calls, when I have nothing to hide?

Click to expand...

Yes, they have WAY overstepped their bounds. I do not understand why more people are not outraged at how the checks and balances our country was founded on have been dispatched so easily. The correct option is make them obtain warrants. Keeps them from abusing it.

And yes, you do have something to fear about them listening to everything. Who the F do you think is doing the listening? Companies like Unisys/Northrop/Lockheed/Booz. Do you think they are cheap? Uh. No. There is a reason our deficit has doubled in the last 7.5 years. It costs a lot to ruin a country.

z987k said:

exactly. Give an inch and they take a mile. I know it's easy to say well it doesn't matter/effect me or whatever, but that is exactly what lead to this in the first place.

Click to expand...

Yet give the government enough rope and they end up six inches short. Crooks. Every one of them. Enough political discourse. I'm tapping out of this one.

s3n8 said:

Yet give the government enough rope and they end up six inches short. Crooks. Every one of them. Enough political discourse. I'm tapping out of this one.

Click to expand...

"The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods."[H. L. Mencken]

noisy123 said:

This is what should really have conservatives freaking out, not where Obama differs with Bush, but where they agree. Despite all Obama's rhetoric to the contrary, this vote shows that one of the areas where he and Bush line up is on the extreme extension of executive power taken on by Bush. While many conservatives might have been perfectly happy to have an unchecked executive with a conservative in office I doubt they'll be happy when the situation changes. I think conservatives have to look at this stuff and honestly ask themselves if they would be okay with these constitutional incursions if a Democrat were doing this.

Click to expand...

Wow that is a great quote, and you know certain Bush power grabs that occurred in 2002 and 2003 so that they could have guantanimo bay and not have to deal with international treaties leaves the next president with an interesting power to disregard any treaty they want. Hypothetically the next president (if it is Obama) could just wake up one day and say "I don't like NAFTA (which he doesn't) we are not going to be part of that any more" and just like that NAFTA is out the window....

s3n8 said:

Bob Barr/Ron Paul ticket anyone?

I USED to support Obama, but he showed his true colors today.

Click to expand...

Ron Paul for sure...:rockin:

POLITICS = POLY from the Greek meaning "many", TICKS = Blood sucking parasites...



Most of out politicians are lawyers, so...Do you know the difference between a catfish and a lawyer?

One's a scum sucking bottom dweller and the other's a fish...

EdWort said:

It would be great if a 3rd party candidate would emerge and we elected him while at the same time tossing every incumbent congrASSman out on their ears.

Click to expand...

Right on Ed. It would be nice about the 3rd party, but tossing the asshats out of congress would be a better start. Trust me, I'm stuck with RICHARD head Durbin.

Ize

Desert Monkey said:

It's the people using the tech. My company uses it to insure you never pay off your credit card.

Click to expand...

So that must explain how you don't get a late fee for a Dell Preferred Card for over a year, and then when you get close to paying it off you start getting a late fee and past due notices when you've made the same payment, the same time, every month.

I think the AMERICAN macrobrewers are INFIDELS!!